On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Andreas Perstinger <andreas.perstin...@gmx.net> wrote: > On 2010-12-23 04:14, Anthony wrote: >> >> I guess... Isn't Bing supposed to be coming out with a more clear >> license? This would be one point for them to clarify. > > Good point. I think the discussion here on the mail list is not leading to a > clear license because we all are just interpreting and guessing.
I've mostly posted questions, which so far have not been answered. I made a couple comments about how I understood the license (when I first read it), but I intended that as an explanation of areas that needed clarification if they differed with the intent. Actually I thought Frederik had some inside information which led him to the conclusions he made. > Wouldn't it be better to tell Bing your special case/your questions? They > have a legal department which should know what they want and with the > questions they get feedback that their license isn't that clear as they > probably thought it is. I guess I could pose the questions to Bing, but really I don't think it's efficient for me to talk to Bing directly. If there is someone on the OSM side who would like to gather up questions/comments to send to Bing, I'd be happy to relay mine. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
